Levels of Analysis in Iraq WarIntroductionFrom argumentative statements in tracking the historical and rational explanation for the war in Iraq towards the issues on terrorist threats, fears of an Iraqi nuclear weapons capability, or the permissive condition created by the collapse of Soviet power and end of the Cold War over a decade earlier fall at the system level of analysis (Crocket et.al., 2007 22).
The form of terror has been changed with warfare from the events on 18th century to the latest issues concern Iraqi wars and terrorism, especially in question of their military capability since the international system level of state diplomacy has also altered and developed the balance of militaristic strengths, most frequently due to allied powers. The main purpose of this is to balance the societal impact of terrorist threats from the war especially with the nuclear deterrence and war capacities of Iraq (Segell, 2004 8).From the historical perspective, the destruction and downfall of Soviet powers and the disadvantaged situations it provided for United States, the applicable procedures relate mainly to endeavor global system, whereas the fears for nuclear capabilities of Iraq still lies as a main concern for the balance of power in the Middle East, particularly in the regional-system sector (Crocket et.al.
, 2007 22).Due to the extremely complex international relations, various experts have concluded that no singular aspect on single level of analysis can provides a complete rationale for the events and reasons of Iraq war. Hence, different theoretical perspectives pertaining to the issues o Iraqi-war, and most of the explanations provided for small to wide scale wars brought by these groups, tend to combine causal variables from different levels of analysis (Crocket et.al.
, 2007 22).As for the study, the main argument revolves on the levels of analysis in the War occurring in Iraq. The study further subdivide the discussion constituting of the system level, individual level and unite level, which all illustrate the perspectives of war and rationale for its occurrence.DiscussionThe System LevelOn this level, the main focus is to analyze the international scope impacted by the Iraq wars.
The focus of these levels is to obtain the most significant information in reveal the long-term or root causes of war, whereas these may even include immediate or proximate etiologies (Cashman and Robinson 2007 4). From the most prominent explanations of war in 2003, Iraq war has been known to have its direct link and multi-causal linkage in the existence of terrorism, especially during the impacts of September 11 attacks. Furthermore, the impacts and social concerns that emerged during the time of Saddam Hussein’s rule until his escape had significantly contributed to the system level of Iraq wars. Saddam Hussein has been known to manage his regime with extreme brutality, which made Iraq one of the fearful sites and dangerous atmospheric ambiance.
In addition, the aim of overthrowing Saddam Hussein’s brutal regime and the establishment of democracy in Iraq, the personality and religious beliefs of George W. Bush, the influence of non-conservatives on U.S. foreign policy, and the intelligence failure regarding Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (Crocket et.
al., 2007 22) have all shaped the systems of perspectives in relation to Iraqi warfare. Even though the levels-of-analysis conceptual pattern has most commonly been applied to states and to international relations, such conceptual pattern are also applied to explain the conditions of war (Crocket et.al.
, 2007 22).From the international perspectives, the main ideas identified are the polarization of alliances, unstable hierarchy or orders provided by the leadership and organizations, the borders that need to be considered, and the frequency of revolutionary wars including those civil conflicts (Geller et.al., 1998 194).
From the scope of systems level, different members of the Bush administration provided the letter addressed to the presidency expressing their support for expanding the disposition and control of the international management in the encounter to Iraq wars. In addition, the system did not only consider the militaristic steps to overrun the Iraqi powers, but also the administration considered the post-war procedures to be fulfilled in order to alleviate those Iraqi victims of war (Copson 2003 169). From this level, the congressional perspective and Bush’s administration consider the building of international relations as the first step to counter the prospects of terrorism. On the other hand, the United States’ aid for Iraqi victims does not mean that they compromise their motives, but rather, as for international responsibility of warfare, which theoretically states the aiding of war-forsaken victims.
Congress recognized that, following the downfall of Saddam Hussein’s regime, significant portions of Iraq will be dependent on humanitarian aid from the United States and the international community, as well as significant numbers of police and military forces to maintain civil order (Copson 2003 169). The countermeasures initiated by the international coalition to battle the crisis of terrorism as well as the effects of Iraqi wars have been bilateral and multilateral strategies that centers mainly on the system’s intelligence (development and improvement of technology to counter terrorism), law enforcements and diplomacy. In addition, international cooperation for the development of security measures in battling against the threats brought by terrorists, Al-Qaeda and Iraqi-wars together with their allies has significantly caused tactical achievements and increased functionality and apprehensions of operatives (Feldman and Shapir 2004 45).The Unit LevelThe power of the regime has been, above all, based on repression, and the use of force has given the Iraqi army a central place in the political system.
Considering that the issues on loyalty and the rule of Nepotism are the main characters of the Iraqi government, this played significant contributions in the modifications and transformations of Iraqi society to favor the national oneness motive. Moreover, Saddam Hussein has been known as one of the devout promulgators of Islamic religion, with who had own the leadership of Iraq. At the center of the personalized relationship that has ensued from this state of affairs is the leadership of Saddam Hussein (Rajaee 1997 154).The Unit level or also revered as the substate levels centers on the small groups of individuals, normally sections or societal classes present in the given affect community.
The analytical focus at this level is on those attributes or characteristics jointly shared by a pair of states and the dynamics of the interaction of these two states with each other (Cashman and Robinson 2007 4). The historical happenings that resorted in the initiation of Iraqi wars have provided essential roles in Iraqi political behavior. From the perspective of the country itself, the building of the state can be regarded as the initiation of identity shifts, which for Iraq connotes the changing of the traditional Iraq and merging it to form a clan, and with a homogeneous religion that facilitates the oneness of the country; hence, national oneness. From the unit perspective under Iraq, one of the main etiologies considered for their initiation of war is the necessary situation for their country to achieve this homogeneous religion.
In addition, as for the Muslim tradition, it is an honor or even a command for them to offer their enemies to their god Allah, which would mean killing of Americans. This is somehow deemed as the structural implication of Iraqi wars as far as the Iraqi civilization and the unit level is concerned (Rajaee 1997 153). On the other hand, from the point of view of the United States, there are four unit levels to consider, such are the power status of the United States versus Iraq, the Power cycle or the critical points of strengths for both countries, allied powers that are available to two warring countries, and the borders to considers within the scope of war (Geller et.al.
, 1998 194). From this perspective, the United States are significantly highly powered country with unquestionable alliance from European, Asian and Northern routes, with which are not present with its opponent country, Iraq. On the other hand, the secrecy of Iraq linkages has evidently helped their sectors to keep on surviving for the last few decades of their war. Moreover, it is important to consider that Iraq’s disposition against border-specific targets is more advantageous on their side.
Iraqi war does not only coincide within their territory but rather the general territories, even inside their enemy’s path; hence, they were able to initiate different tactical methods to counter United States’ intelligence while at the same time, causing turmoil through threats of terrorism.The Individual LevelOn the perspective of individual level, the primary focus lies in the impact of Iraq wars in every single level, such as the president, prime ministers, and monarchs- in determining the outbreak of war and its effects in this level of perspectives (Cashman and Robinson 2007 4). The contributing components at this level of analysis are most significantly short-term or immediate etiologies of Iraqi-wars; they also are broadly viewed as etiological subsidies to explain why the war occurred. However, their point of significance still relies in the fact that these concepts are mainly related to short-term causes, which cannot directly b sued to explain the entire causal phenomena of the war.
Nevertheless, from this level, the considerable variables to consider are the political leaders that tend to act as the prime political leaders in resolving the issues of war (Cashman and Robinson 2007 4-5). From this perspective, we can consider the leadership brought by President George Bush that greatly shaped the response of U.S military forces from the Al Qaeda involvements of Middle East countries, most especially Iraq. In one example, last 2003, the congressional propositions as well as scholars and journalists proposed the massive invasion against Iraq to the U.
S government. From this point, prominent officials and individuals argued that U.S intervention can only obtain its decision from the presidency, which is by that time, President George Bush. From his individual perspective, President George’s worldview and religious inclinations have influenced his determination in finishing the conflicts between the United States and Iraq.
He also considered this as the job initiated by his own father, and in accordance to his disregard for information running contrary to his beliefs and policy preferences (Crocket et.al., 2007 22). From this point, it is evidently manifested that the unit system for the decision making lies with one individual that possesses the greatest authorities among the body of counselors and decision makers.
For states in the perspective of unit level, individual-level theory of war has to be subsumed within a theory of foreign policies since it is states, not individuals that make war. Although, it is important to consider that political leaders that prefer war engagements are prevented from implementing that strategy by domestic constituencies. Alternatively (but less frequently), political leaders who believe that war is contrary to the national interest are sometimes pushed into war by a xenophobic public opinion (Crocket et.al.
, 2007 22-23).ConclusionAt the end of the study, the conclusion provided that the Iraq wars are influenced mainly by three occurring levels, specifically system level, individual levels and unit levels. From the perspectives of system levels, the international scope and approach to Iraq has been discussed, which mainly considers the right of both parties to aid those victims of war as the system implies. From the individual perspective, the main focus emphasizes the importance of sectoral and congressional opinions in response to the move of a country as provided in the situation of the warring country Iraq.
Lastly, the perspective of unit level is discussed wherein the main emphasis is the individual decision maker themselves, such as the presidency of George W. Bush that significantly influence the United States’ approach towards Iraq threats and war.Works CitedCashman, Greg, and Leonard C. Robinson.
An introduction to the causes of war: patterns of interstate conflict from World War I to Iraq. Rowman & Littlefield, 2007.Copson, Raymond W. The Iraq War: Background and Issues.
Nova Publishers, 2003.Crocker et.al., Chester A.
Leashing the Dogs of War: Conflict Management in a Divided World. US Institute of Peace Press, 2007.Feldman, Shai, and Yiftah Shapir. The Middle East Strategic Balance, 2003-2004.
Sussex Academic Press, 2004.Geller et.al.,, Daniel S.
Nations at War: A Scientific Study of International Conflict. Cambridge University Press, 1998.Rajaee, Fahrang. Iranian Perspectives on the Iran-Iraq War.
University Press of Florida, 1997.Segell, Glen A. Disarming Iraq. Glen Segell Publishers, 2004.
